ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
Accuracy of digital jaw relation determination in different occlusal conditions - an in vitro study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn orthodontics, accurate registration of jaw relationships is essential for correct diagnosis and treatment planning. Therefore, accuracy of the digital spatial registration of maxillary and mandibular models and - for the first time-the influence of dentition stage and malocclusion type on this procedure were investigated under controlled conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsEight pairs of jaw models, representing different occlusal and developmental statuses (m1-m8), were scanned using two IOS types (PS: Primescan; TR: Trios4). Buccal scans for registering maxillary and mandibular models were repeated (n = 3). Reference scans were obtained using a desktop scanner (RDS; Ceramill Map 600). Arch-specific 3D coordinate systems were used to calculate the linear and angular deviations among different registrations. Trueness of registration by PS and TR was calculated using a statistical mixed-effect model (random-effect: model-type). Precision values of IOS registrations across m1-m8 were characterized as standard deviations (SDs).
resultsAs maximum deviations compared to RDS, PS showed caudal translation (0.11 ± 0.02 mm), while TR showed ventral translation (0.08 ± 0.06 mm), of the maxillary relative to the mandibular model. Maximum rotational values were calculated for tilting around the transverse axis (PS: anteinclination (0.25 ± 0.16°), TR: retroinclination (0.27 ± 0.16°)). These deviations varied with the malocclusion type. The lowest IOS precision was recorded for sagittal translation (PS: 0.013 ± 0.005 mm, TR: 0.021 ± 0.010 mm) and rotation around the transverse axis (PS: 0.051 ± 0.013°, TR: 0.076 ± 0.031°). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Registrations using buccal IOS scans showed quantifiable but clinically negligible 3D deviations from reference scan registrations, whereby the type of tooth and jaw misalignment did not appear to have a clinically relevant influence. Therefore, the examined IOSs appear to be suitable for digital jaw relation determination in everyday clinical orthodontic practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39673620What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.